The scathing rebuke of ideological radicals on our extreme Court below is a footnote in Judge McBurney’s opinion knocking down the Georgia abortion law. I am not a lawyer or court watcher, just an average citizen, but wow (emphasis added):
The fundament upon which the majority rested its opinion -- the falsely modest precept that “the Court is not the source of the Constitution’s meaning” -- guaranteed the outcome but misstates judicial (and political) reality. State v. SisterSong Women of Color Reprod. Justice Collective, 317 Ga. 528, 533 (2023). Of course the Constitution means what it means; such circularity tells us nothing. Ultimately, the Constitution means only what the courts tell us, and the Supreme Courts of the States and the Nation have the controlling voices in that discussion. Unsurprisingly (one would think), this results in different meanings being prescribed to the same words, phrases, and provisions as different minds and sensibilities take their turn discerning that meaning. In other words, the meaning of the Constitution is no more fixed than is the composition of the majority in the highest courts of the land -- especially when formerly bedrock principles such as stare decisis appear to be on the wane. In other words, the meaning of the Constitution is no more fixed than is the composition of the majority in the highest courts of the land -- especially when formerly bedrock principles such as stare decisis appear to be on the wane.
Not only did he rip them a new asshole, he called their bluff. Again, as a layman, I read that last line as saying “Okay, you just said we can ignore all previous precedent and just go with our own personal opinion about the issue at hand. You opened Pandora’s box John Roberts, and here is what you get.” Maybe I am wrong and he overstepped his bounds, but I am so glad to see basic logic and morality applied to real life issues. Expecting it to be slapped down hard though.
